JESUS AND THE RAPTURE. by Andy Woods. Introduction. usually come to mind: Matt 24:40-41 and John 14:1-4. The purpose of this paper is to

Transcription

1 JESUS AND THE RAPTURE by Andy Woods Introduction Did Jesus ever refer to the rapture? When this question is asked, two passages usually come to mind: Matt 24:40-41 and John 14:1-4. The purpose of this paper is to show that although Christ did not refer to the rapture in Matt 24:40-41, He did refer to the rapture in John 14:1-4. The first part of this paper is an examination of Matthew 24:40-41 as a potential rapture passage. This section seeks to dissuade readers from connecting Christ's statement in Matt 24:40-41 to the rapture through an examination of the role of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew's overall argument, through an examination of the textual details within and surrounding Matthew 24:40-41, and by noting the inadequacy of the arguments for a rapture interpretation of Matthew 24: The second part of the paper is an examination of John 14:1-4 as a potential rapture passage. This section will attempt to argue that Christ was referring to the rapture in John 14:1-4 by making several preliminary observations that should create an openness to the rapture interpretation, by observing the textual details of John 14:1-4 that point in the direction of a rapture interpretation, and by showing the inadequacy of the alternative non-rapture interpretations of John 14:1-4. Matthew 24:40-41 Matthew 24:40-41 says, "Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken, and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left." It is common for popular prophecy writers to assign a rapture 1

2 significance to these verses. 1 A popular 1970's Christian song by Larry Norman similarly interpreted these verses as pertaining to the rapture: "A man and wife asleep in bed. She hears a noise and turns her head, he's gone. I wish we'd all been ready. Two men walking up a hill. One disappears and one's left standing still. I wish we'd all been ready." However, a close examination of the passage demonstrates that it is unlikely that it is referring to the rapture. Matthew's Argument and the Olivet Discourse Matthew's Jewish-Christian Audience Understanding the role of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew's overall argument weakens the notion of attaching a rapture significance to Matt 24: Although no specific target audience is mentioned, various clues make it apparent that Matthew had a believing Jewish audience in mind. 2 The Jewish nature of the book is apparent by noting several factors. First, the book contains a disproportionate number of Old Testament citations and allusions. Of the book's 129 Old Testament references, 53 are direct citations and 76 are allusions. On thirteen occasions, Christ s actions are said to be a fulfillment of the Old Testament. Second, the book follows a fivefold division. The five major sermons of the book are delineated through the repetition of the concluding formula when He had finished saying these things (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). This fivefold structure would have immediately been recognizable to the Jewish mind since Jews had a tendency to categorize items, such as the Book of Psalms and the Pentateuch, according to a fivefold division. Third, although originally written in Greek, the book evidences a Hebraistic style, parallelism, and elaboration. 1 Dave Hunt, How Close Are We? Compelling Evidence for the Soon Return of Christ (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1993), Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Portland: Multnomah, 1980; reprint, Grand Rapids, Kregel, 2005),

3 Fourth, tote ( then or at that time ) reflects a Jewish style. While this term is employed ninety times in Matthew, it is only used six times in Mark, fourteen times in Luke, and ten times in John. Fifth, the vocabulary of the book is distinctly Jewish. The following Jewish terms are found in the book: David, Jerusalem as the Holy City (4:5; 27:53), city of the great king (5:35), lost sheep of the house of Israel (10:6; 15:24), kingdom of God, and kingdom of heaven. 3 Sixth, the subject matter of the topics covered is distinctly Jewish. Among the topics covered are the Law, ceremonial defilements, Sabbath, kingdom, Jerusalem, temple, Messiah, prophecy, prophets, David, Abram, Moses, scribes, Sadducees, and Pharisees. Seventh, Matthew s genealogy reveals a Jewish audience. Matthew traces Christ back to David and Abraham rather than back to Adam (Luke 3). Eighth, Matthew places a special focus upon the Apostle Peter. Because Peter was the apostle to the circumcised (Gal 2:7-8), Matthew s focus on Peter harmonizes with the Jewish emphasis of his book. Ninth, unlike the other Gospels that explain Jewish customs to Gentile audiences, Matthew leaves these same Jewish customs unexplained. This is true not only with regard to Jewish rulers (Matt 2:1, 22; 14:1; Luke 2:1-2; 3:1-2) but it is also true with regard to ceremonial cleansing (Matt 15:2; Mark 7:3-4). The customs that Matthew does explain are of Roman rather than Jewish origin (Matt 27:15). Although some of Matthew s writings seem to anticipate at least some kind of Gentile audience by giving the interpretation of some Jewish words (1:23; 27:33, 46), it does seem to be a general rule that Matthew provides fewer interpretations of Jewish customs than any other Gospel writer. 3 Interestingly, kingdom of heaven appears thirty one times (3:2; 4:17; 5:3, 10, 19, 20; 7:21; 8:11; 10:7; 11:11, 12; 13:11, 24, 31, 33, 44, 45, 47, 52; 16:19; 18:1, 3, 4, 23; 19:14, 23; 20:1; 22:2; 23:13; 25:1) and kingdom of God (6:33; 12:28; 19:24; 21:31; 21:43) appears only five times. These terms are synonymous (Matt 19:23-24). However, the multiple references to the former and the scant references to the latter also reflect a common Jewish reluctance of mentioning God s name directly. 3

4 Tenth, various church fathers, such as Irenaeus, Origen, and Eusebius believed that Matthew wrote to a Jewish audience. Not only was Matthew written to a Jewish audience but to a believing audience as well. In other words, Matthew s audience primarily consisted of Jewish Christians. Both Eusebius 4 and Origen 5 indicated that Matthew was written to those within Judaism who came to believe. Matthew's Purpose and Argument Matthew wrote in order to accomplish three purposes. 6 First, he wrote to convince his Jewish audience that the Christ in whom they had believed was indeed the long-awaited Jewish Messiah. Thus, Matthew shows that Christ was the rightful heir to the Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants. Matthew appeals to a variety of devices to accomplish this purpose such as genealogies, fulfilled prophecy, messianic titles, kingdom teachings, and miracles. Because the Jewish understanding was that the kingdom would be immediately established upon the arrival of the king (Isa 9:6-7; Matt 20:20-21), the next logical question that a Jew would ask is, if Christ is indeed the Jewish king then where is His kingdom? Thus, Matthew wrote for the second purpose of explaining why the kingdom had been postponed despite the fact that the king had already arrived. In order to accomplish this purpose, Matthew carefully traces the kingdom program. Here Matthew explains the kingdom s offer to the nation (3:2; 4:17; 10:5-7; 15:24), its rejection by the nation (11 12; 21 23; 26 27), the present interim program for those who will inherit the kingdom (sons of the kingdom) due to Israel s rejection of the kingdom (13; 16:18), and the nation s eventual acceptance of the kingdom (23:38-39; 24:14, 31; 25:31). The notion 4 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Ibid., Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew,

5 of a past rejection and future acceptance of the kingdom by national Israel would lead to the question, what is God doing in the present? Thus, Matthew wrote for the third purpose of explaining God s interim program. Here, Matthew introduces the interim program that the sons of the kingdom will experience (Matt 13), as well as the advent of the church (Matt 16:18; 18:17; 28:18-20). The Church Age represents God s present earthly program between Israel s past rejection and future acceptance of the King and His kingdom. Since Christ s disciples would play foundational roles in the church (Eph 2:20), Matthew explains how Christ prepared them not only for His death but also for their new role in the church age. At the time of writing, the Gentiles were becoming more prominent in the church. The Jewish believers needed an explanation for this Gentile inclusion. Thus, Matthew explains how God s interim program would thrust the Gentiles into prominence (2:1-12; 8:11-12; 13:38; 15:22-28). In sum, Matthew selectively (John 20:30-31; 21:25) includes material from Christ s life in order to accomplish these purposes. Therefore, the message of Matthew is the confirmation to Jewish Christians that Jesus is their predicted king who ushered in an interim program by building the sons of the kingdom into the church in between Israel s past rejection and future acceptance of her King. In addition to this overarching purpose, Matthew wrote to accomplish three sub-purposes. First, Matthew wanted to confirm the Jewish Christians in their faith. He wanted them to understand that the Jesus in whom they had believed was indeed the Jewish king. This was true in spite of the fact that the kingdom had not immediately materialized according to their expectations and instead God s program had taken a new direction. Second, Matthew wrote to offer the believing Jews an explanation regarding Gentile inclusion in God s present program. This was an explanation that the believing Jews desperately needed since the church was on the verge of becoming predominately Gentile through the coming three missionary journeys launched from Syrian Antioch. Thus, Matthew wrote his Gospel from this very locale for the purpose of assisting the 5

6 church through this delicate transition. Third, Matthew wanted to encourage the Jewish Christians. Thus, he explained that although Israel had rejected her king, God was going to use this negative act for the positive purpose of including the Gentiles. He was also going to restore the kingdom to Israel in the future. Matthew's Structure A major structural clue in Matthew's Gospel is the repetition of the concluding phrase when He had finished saying these things (7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1). This formula alerts the reader to the book s five major discourses. Each discourse concludes with this phrase. Thus, the five major discourses include the Sermon on the Mount (5 7), the missionary discourse (10), the kingdom parables (13), the discourse on humility (18), and the Olivet Discourse (24 25). 7 In order to explain to his Jewish-Christian audience how Christ can be the Jewish king and yet at the same time the Jewish kingdom is absent and the Gentiles are prominent in the mystery age, Matthew develops a well-organized argument. First, he establishes Christ s messianic identity and traces Christ s offer of the kingdom to Israel (1 10). Second, he shows the nation s rejection of this offer (11 12; 20:29 23:39). Third, he explains God s inclusion of the Gentiles in the mystery age during the kingdom s absence and postponement (13:1 20:28). Matthew then develops the final part of his argument. Although the kingdom has been postponed in the present, it will be re-offered to and accepted by the nation in the future. Although he has alluded to this restoration earlier (17:1-13; 19:28; 20:20-28), Matthew most clearly develops the idea of the kingdom s restoration to Israel in his fifth and final discourse section known as the Olivet Discourse (24 25). 8 Matthew s Jewish audience would have been familiar with Old 7 Ibid., Ibid.,

7 Testament Scripture predicting Israel s conversion as a result of the Great Tribulation (Jer 30:7; Dan 9:24-27). The Olivet Discourse is simply an amplification of these prophecies (24:15). Matthew includes this final phase of his argument in order to give his Jewish readers hope that present Gentile prominence in the mystery age does not mean that God has forsaken His covenant promises to His chosen nation. Emphasis of the Olivet Discourse Matthew s emphasis upon Israel s restoration in the Olivet Discourse grows out of the final verses of the previous chapter (23:37-39). There, Christ expressed His desire to gather (episynagō) Israel. However, the nation had rejected the kingdom offer. Christ promises that the time would come when the nation would acknowledge Him as the Messiah by chanting a messianic Psalm (Ps 118:26; Matt 21:9) thereby allowing Christ to return and re-gather (episynagō) His nation (23:39). Thus, the Olivet Discourse furnishes the circumstances through which Israel s restoration and final regathering will be achieved (24:31). If the Olivet Discourse is a natural extension of Christ's promise to restore the nation in the future, interpreters should not be surprised to discover the Jewish nature of this discourse. After all, Christ's promise of restoration at the end of Matthew 23 was given exclusively to Israel. Christ makes this clear through the twofold repetition of the word "Jerusalem" in Matt 23:37a. Moreover, various Jewish references, such as the destruction of the second temple (24:1-2), the offer of the kingdom (24:14), Daniel s prophecy of the seventy weeks (24:15), the holy place (24:15), the desecration of the temple (24:15), the flight into the Judean wilderness (24:16), the Sabbath (24:20), the elect (24:22), the Messiah (24:23-24), and the Davidic Throne (25:31), found throughout 7

8 the discourse make it clear that the Olivet Discourse primarily concerns Israel. 9 In sum, the Olivet Discourse plays a critical role in Matthew's overall presentation to his Jewish- Christian audience. As explained, his inclusion of the Olivet Discourse is designed to give his readers hope of a future Jewish kingdom. Such a theme should have a bearing upon how Matt 24:40-41 is interpreted. Rather than understanding these verses as relating to Church Age truth, such as the rapture, it is better to understand them against the backdrop of the Tribulation judgment leading to Israel's restoration. Textual Details Within and Surrounding Matthew 24:40-41 Not only does Matthew's overall argument mitigate understanding Matt 24:40-41 as the rapture, but the details of the text within and surrounding Matt 24:40-41 also weaken a rapture interpretation of these verses. Such details include the passage's connection with Noah's day, the order of the other Matthean judgments, and the Lukan parallel passage. The Connection to Noah's Day The context of Matthew 24:40-41 relates directly to what transpired in Noah's day, which is described in the immediately preceding verses (Matt 24:37-39). These earlier verses say, "For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the Flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be" (Matt 24:37-39). These verses are then followed by verses 40-41, which say, "Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken, and one will be left." The connective tote, which 9 Ibid., 277; Renald Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come!: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church (Bellmawr, NJ: Friends of Isrel, 1995),

9 begins verse 40 links verses with verses Because of this connective, if we can understand who was taken in Noah's day, it will help us understand who will be taken in verses When verse 39 says, "the flood came and took them all away," it is a reference to the unbelievers who did not enter the ark and consequently were taken away by the Flood. While the unbelievers of Noah's day were taken away in judgment, Noah was preserved from being swept away in judgment thereby allowing him to enter the next dispensation of Human Government. Thus, by way of analogy, the man taken from the field and the woman taken from grinding at the mill (40-41) are unbelievers being taken away into judgment at the Lord's return. While the unbelievers will be taken away in judgment, the believers will be left behind thereby allowing them to enter the next dispensation of the millennial kingdom. Such an order is the exact opposite of the rapture, which will take believers away into eternal bliss and leave the unbelievers behind upon the earth to experience divine judgment (1 Thess 4:13-18; 1 Cor 15:50-58). Thus, the more verses are connected with the events of Noah's day as depicted in the same context, the less probable it is to ascribe to verses a rapture interpretation. This view that Matt 24:40-41 refers to judgment at the Second Advent rather than the rapture is held by numerous credible Bible interpreters. According to Walvoord: According to Matthew 24:40-41, "Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left." Because at the rapture, believers will be taken out of the world, some have confused this with the rapture of the church. Here, however, the situation is the reverse. The one who is left, is left to enter the kingdom; the one who is taken, is taken in judgment. This is in keeping with the illustration of the time of Noah when the ones taken away are the unbelievers. 10 Feinberg also explains: 10 John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago: Moody, 1974),

10 It will be a taking away judicially and in judgment. The ones left will enjoy the blessings of Christ's reign on earth, just as Noah and his family were left to continue on earth. This is the opposite of the rapture, where those who are left go into the judgment of the Great Tribulation. 11 Showers echoes: Jesus was not referring to the Rapture of the church in Matthew 24. When that event takes place, all the saved will be removed from the earth to meet Christ in the air, and all the unsaved will be left on the earth. Thus, the rapture will occur in reverse of the order of things in the days of Noah and, therefore, the reverse of the order at Jesus' coming immediately after the Great Tribulation. 12 Toussaint similarly notes, "Since it is parallel in thought with those who were taken in the judgment of the flood, it is best to refer the verb to those who are taken for judgment preceding the establishment of the kingdom." 13 Order of the Other Matthean Judgments Matthew's description of the flood of Noah's day, which depicts the unbelievers being taken in judgment while the believers are left behind to enter the new dispensation, is by no means an isolated case. All of the Matthean judgments follow the same pattern. For example, in the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matt 13:24-30), it is the tares or the unbelievers that are first gathered to be burned (Matt 13:30a, 41-42). Then the wheat or the saved are left behind to enter the kingdom (Matt 13:30b, 43). Moreover, in the parable of the dragnet (Matt 13:47-50), it is the bad fish or the unbelievers that are first gathered to be thrown away (Matt 13:48b, 49-50). Then the good fish, or the saved, are left behind to enter the kingdom (Matt 13:48a). In addition, in the parable of the sheep and the goats (Matt 25:31-46), it is the goats, or the unbelievers, that are first cast off the earth into judgment (Matt 25:41-46). Then the sheep, or the saved, are left behind to enter 1953), Charles L. Feinberg, Israel in the Last Days: The Olivet Discourse (Altadena, CA: Emeth, 12 Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come!: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church, 13 Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew,

11 the kingdom (Matt 25:34-40). Matthew's consistent pattern of judgment found throughout his book is that the unsaved are taken into judgment while the saved are left behind to enter into the kingdom. Thus, the same order of events is likely in view in Matt 24: Such an order would contradict the order of the rapture where the exact opposite chronology will transpire. The Lukan Parallel Passage Luke 17:26-37 offers the parallel passage to Matthew 24:40-41: "And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. It was the same as happened in the days of Lot: they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; but on the day that Lot went out from Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. It will be just the same on the day that the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, the one who is on the housetop and whose goods are in the house must not go down to take them out; and likewise the one who is in the field must not turn back. Remember Lot's wife. Whoever seeks to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. I tell you, on that night there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other will be left. There will be two women grinding at the same place; one will be taken and the other will be left. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left." And answering they said to Him, "Where, Lord?" And He said to them, "Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered." In addition to Matthew's description of one man taken from the field and the woman taken away from grinding, Luke adds the one taken from the bed and the other left. Luke also records the disciples' question "Where, Lord?" (Luke 17:37a). This inquiry relates to the locale to where those taken will go since Christ made it clear that those not taken will be left upon the earth. Christ answers, "Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered" (Luke 17:37b). "Vultures" refers to those birds of prey that 11

12 gorge on the flesh of corpses. 14 Such imagery connotes judgment where the birds of prey will feast upon carcasses of the deceased (Matt 24:28; Rev 19:17-18, 21). By using such imagery, Christ explains that those taken in Luke 17:34-36 are those taken into destruction and judgment. Of course, the rapture involves the opposite. At the rapture, those taken are taken into glory rather than judgment. Thus, the Lukan parallel passage with its emphasis upon being taken into judgment substantially weakens the rapture interpretation of Matthew 24: In sum, the connection with Noah's day, the consistent order of the other Matthean judgments, and the Lukan parallel passage all negate a rapture interpretation of Matt 24: Inadequacy of Arguments Favoring a Rapture in Matt 24:40-41 Thus far we have seen that Matthew 24:40-41 should not be given a rapture interpretation based upon the place of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew's overall argument and based upon an examination of the textual details within and surrounding Matthew 24: This section furthers this same thesis by noting the inadequacy of the arguments for a rapture interpretation of Matthew 24: Such arguments include the use of paralambanō in verses 40-41, the rapture is in view in Matt 24:31, the day or hour of the Second Advent can be discerned once the Tribulation period begins, and that normal life activities as depicted in Matt 24:40-41 could not take place at the end of the Tribulation period. The Use of Paralambanō in Matthew 24:40-41 One of the reasons various interpreters believe that the rapture is in view in Matt 24:40-41 is because of Matthew's switch from airō when describing those "taken" in 14 Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., ed. Frederick William Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 22, Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come!: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church, 12

13 the Flood in verse 39 to paralambanō when describing those "taken" in verses Those who believe that the rapture is in view in verses are quick to point out that paralambanō in these verses is the same word that John used to depict those taken in the rapture in John 14:3. According to this argument, Christ must also be describing taking believers to Himself in Matt 24: However, several reasons make it apparent that Matthew's use of paralambanō in these verses need not signal to the reader that the apostle has suddenly switched to a discussion of the rapture. 16 First, paralambanō is a non-technical term. It is not a word that has the same definition everywhere it is used. While paralambanō can refer to the Lord taking believers to Himself (John 14:3), it also can refer to a taking away in a negative sense. For example, it is used to describe Satan taking Jesus to a venue for purposes of temptation (Matt 4:5, 8), a demon taking other demons for the purposes of indwelling a man (Matt 12:45), and Christ being taken away to be abused (Matt 27:27) and eventually crucified (John 19:16). Thus, whenever paralambanō is used, its meaning must be determined from its context. As explained previously, the context of Matt 24:40-41 involves judgment rather than deliverance. 17 Second, it is possible for two different words for "taking" to describe the same event rather than different events. For example 2 Kgs 2 uses two different Hebrew words to describe Elijah being taken to heaven. Second Kgs 2:1 uses alah to describe this taking. Second Kgs 2:3, 5 uses laqach to describe the same event. Interestingly, John 19:15-16 uses both airō (vs. 15) and paralambanō (vs. 16) to denote the singular event of Christ being taken away for crucifixion. Why cannot Matthew 24:39-41 also use the same two words to allude to the singular event of Christ's return in judgment? 16 Ibid., Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew, 281; Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come, ; Ed Glasscock, Matthew, Moody Gospel Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1997),

14 Third, there is a logical reason for the use of two different Greek words in Matt 24: When God took the unbelievers away into judgment in Noah's day, he used an impersonal agency to do so: the floodwaters. However, when He takes the unbelievers away into judgment following His return, He will use a personal agency to do so: angelic beings. Although angelic beings are not specifically mentioned in Matt 24:40-41, they are mentioned in the Matthean parallel passages describing the future judgment awaiting unbelievers at Christ's Second Advent (Matt 13:39, 49). Thus, the switch in Greek words in Matt 24:39-41 may simply signal the different agencies that the Lord uses in judgment rather than a switch in a judgment-coming (Matt 24:39) to a rapture-coming (Matt 24:40-41). Thus, Toussaint summarizes, "The differences in verbs can be accounted for on the basis of accuracy of description." 18 Rapture in Matt 24:31? Many are confident that the rapture is in view Matt 24:40-41 because the rapture is also conspicuous in the same context (Matt 24:31). Matt 24:31 says, "And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other." Those who hold to a rapture interpretation of this passage point to the numerous similarities between the coming of Christ in Matt 24:31 and other rapture passages such as 1 Thess 4:13-18 and 1 Cor 15: Examples of such similarities include Christ's coming in a cloud (Matt 24:30), the sounding of a trumpet, and the world-wide gathering of believers (Matt 24:31). 19 On account of these similarities with other well-known rapture passages, many are confident that the rapture is in view in Matthew 24:31 and thus also in Matt 24: Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew, Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973),

15 However, it is a logical fallacy to assume that mere similarity is the same as equality. For example, although one can point to similarities between my two automobiles, this is not to say that one automobile is the same as the other. While there may be some points of similarity between Matt 24:31 and other rapture passages, this does not necessarily mean that the two passages are speaking of the same event especially if it can be shown that there are substantial differences between the passages. Many observe that any similarities between Matt 24:31 and other rapture passages are outweighed by substantial differences. Ice observes, "In 1 Thessalonians 4 believers are gathered in the air and taken to heaven, while in Matthew 24 they are gathered after Christ s arrival to earth.." 20 Sproule queries: Where does Paul mention the darkening of the sun (Matt. 24:29), the moon not giving its light (Matt. 24:29), the stars falling from the sky (Matt. 24:29), the powers of the heavens being shaken (Matt. 24:29), all the tribes of the earth mourning (Matt. 24:30), all the world seeing the coming of the Son of Man (Matt. 24:30), or God sending forth angels (Matt.24:31)? 21 Feinberg similarly notes: Notice what happens when you examine both passages carefully. In Matthew the Son of Man comes on the clouds, while in 1 Thessalonians 4 the ascending believers are in them. In Matthew the angels gather the elect; in 1 Thessalonians the Lord Himself (note the emphasis) gathers the believers. Thessalonians only speaks of the voice of the archangel. In the Olivet Discourse nothing is said about a resurrection, while in the latter text it is the central point. In the two passages the differences in what will take place prior to the appearance of Christ is striking. Moreover, the order of ascent is absent from Matthew in spite of the fact that it is the central part of the epistle Thomas Ice, Matthew 24:31: Rapture or Second Coming?, online: accessed 31 August 2011, John A. Sproule, An Exegetical Defense of Pretribulationalism (Th.D. diss., Grace Theological Seminary, 1981), Paul D. Feinberg, Response: Paul D. Feinberg, in The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Posttribulational, ed. Richard R. Reiter (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984),

16 In order to equate Matt 24:31 with the rapture passages, a reconciliation of all of these differences is needed rather than merely highlighting a handful of similarities. Also, Showers explains how the imagery of Matt 24:31 has more in common with what the Old Testament predicts concerning Israel's eschatological regathering rather than the church's rapture. First, because of Israel s persistent rebellion against God, He declared that He would scatter the Jews into all the winds (Ezek. 5:10, 12) or toward all winds (Ezek. 17:21). In Zechariah 2:6 God stated that He did scatter them abroad as four winds of the heavens.... God did scatter the Jews all over the world. Next, God also declared that in the future Israel would be gathered from the east, west, north, and south, from the ends of the earth (Isa. 43:5-7). We should note that in the context of this promise, God called Israel His chosen (vv. 10, 20)... Just as Jesus indicated that the gathering of His elect from the four directions of the world will take place in conjunction with a great trumpet (literal translation of the Greek text of Mt. 24:21), so Isaiah 27:13 teaches that the scattered children of Israel will be gathered to their homeland in conjunction with the blowing of a great trumpet (literal translation of the Hebrew)... Gerhard Friedrich wrote that in that future eschatological day a great horn shall be blown (Is. 27:13) and the exiled will be brought back by that signal. Again he asserted that in conjunction with the blowing of the great trumpet of Isaiah 27:13, There follows the gathering of Israel and the return of the dispersed to Zion. It is significant to note that Isaiah 27:13, which foretells this future regathering of Israel, is the only specific reference in the Old Testament to a great trumpet. Although Isaiah 11:11-12 does not refer to a great trumpet, it is parallel to Isaiah 27:13 because it refers to the same regathering of Israel. In its context, this passage indicates that when the Messiah (a root of Jesse, vv. 1, 10) comes to rule and transform the world as an ensign (a banner), He will gather together the scattered remnant of His people Israel from the four corners of the earth. 23 In fact, contextually, the regathering spoken of in Matt 24:31 harks back to Matt 23:37. There Christ expressed a desire to gather an unwilling first-century Israel. He clearly identifies His audience as Israel in verse 37 with the twofold repetition of the word "Jerusalem." However, although first-century Israel was unwilling to be gathered by her Messiah, a future generation of repentant Jews will be regathered by Christ upon Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come!: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church, 16

17 His return at the conclusion of the Tribulation. Matthew uses the same verb "gather" (episynagō) in both Matt 23:37 and Matt 24:31 in order to draw this connection. Day or Hour Can Be Known in the Tribulation Those who argue that Matt 24:40-41 is speaking of the rapture rather than the Second Advent note that the context favors the rapture. It is contended that this point is especially true considering Matt 24:36, which says, "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." It is argued that the phrase no one knows the day or the hour (24:36) cannot be speaking of the Second Advent at the end of the Tribulation since people would know the time of that event. This event will take place exactly seven years after the Antichrist enters into the peace treaty with Israel (Dan 9:27). Because, Matt 24:36 cannot be speaking of the Second Advent, it must be speaking of the rapture. However, the phrase in verse 36 could be given from the perspective of an unbeliever. 24 Unbelievers will always be unprepared for Christ's return regardless of what era of history they are living in. Matthew 24:42 exhorts believers to be alert. The same Greek verb for "alert" (grēgoreō) as used in Matt 24:42 is also used in 1 Thess 5:6 and Rev 16:15. Both 1 Thess 5:4-6 and Rev 16:15 speak of the nonalert state of the unbeliever regarding Christ's return. First Thess 5:3 says, "While they are saying, 'Peace and safety!' then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child; and they will not escape." By contrast, the child of God will not be caught off guard for Christ's return since he is a child of the day rather than the night (1 Thess 5:4). 24 Thomas Ice, An Interpretation of Matthew 24 25, Part XXXV, online: accessed 1 September 2011,

18 Also, Revelation 16:15 provides the following parenthetical statement after the sixth bowl judgment: "Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see his shame." Late in the Tribulation, this verse analogizes Christ's return to a thief coming upon an unprepared victim. Thus, even after eighteen of Revelation's nineteen judgments have transpired, unbelievers in the Tribulation will still be caught off guard by Christ's return. Interpreting verse 36 from the perspective of the unbeliever fits the parallel with Noah's day (Matt 24:37-39) that immediately follows verse 36 and concludes before verses In Noah's day, it was the unbelievers who were caught off guard when the Flood-judgment finally came (Matt 24:39) despite Noah's faithful warning of coming judgment (2 Pet 2:5) for 120 years (Gen 6:3). Because Matt 24:36 is similarly narrated from the perspective of the unbeliever, it can be understood as a reference to the Second Coming rather than the rapture. Although the time of the rapture is unknown to all, the time of the Second Advent at the end of the Tribulation period will be unknown to unbelievers. Normal Life Activities at the End of the Tribulation? A final argument used to contend that Matt 24:40-41 is speaking of the rapture rather than Christ's judgment-coming in His Second Advent at the end of the Tribulation relates to how normal life seems to be described in these verses. They speak of people working in the field, grinding at the mill, sleeping in the bed (Luke 17:34), etc...given the global judgments of the Tribulation, how could normal life patterns be taking place prior to Christ's Second Advent? Therefore, according to some, it makes far more sense to associate these events with the rapture before the Tribulation unfolds. Dave Hunt notes: When Christ says, As it was in the days of Noah and Lot, it is absolutely certain that He is not describing conditions that will prevail at the time of the Second Coming. Therefore, these must be the conditions which will prevail just prior to 18

19 the Rapture at a different time and, obviously, before the devastation of the tribulation period. 25 By way of response, the primary purpose of these verses is not to describe normal life patterns. Christ's major point was to emphasize the unprepared state of the unbeliever. It is possible that verses are a figure of speech depicting unbelievers being caught up in the system of the Antichrist during the Tribulation. Therefore these verses are not speaking of ordinary life. Unbelievers in the Antichrist's system will be so caught up in everyday life that they will not be looking for Christ's return. Consequently, they will be caught off guard when the Second Advent takes place. This point is the major one that Christ seeks to get across rather than describing life behavior at the Tribulation's conclusion. In sum, the arguments used by those seeking to find the rapture rather than the Second Advent in Matt 24:40-41 are answerable. Such arguments include the use of paralambanō in verses 40-41, the rapture is in view in Matt 24:31, the day or hour of the Second Advent can be discerned once the Tribulation period begins, and that normal life activities as depicted in Matt 24:40-41 could not take place at the end of the Tribulation. Conclusion Matthew 24:40-41 is not a rapture text. This point has been established through an examination of the role of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew's overall argument, through an examination of the textual details within and surrounding Matthew 24:40-41, and by noting the inadequacy of the arguments for a rapture interpretation of Matthew 24: Since the rapture is not found in Matt 24:40-41, is there a better place to locate the rapture in Christ's teaching? The second part of this paper provides the answer to this important question. 25 Hunt, How Close Are We? Compelling Evidence for the Soon Return of Christ,

20 John 14:1-4 This section of the paper will attempt to argue that Christ spoke of the rapture of the church in John 14:1-4. These verses say: Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And you know the way where I am going. This section will attempt to make this argument by noting several preliminary reasons why interpreters should be open to a rapture teaching in this passage, by contending that the details of the text favor a rapture interpretation, and by noting the inadequacy of the views advocating a non-rapture interpretation of John 14:1-4. Preliminary Reasons There are five preliminary reasons why interpreters should be open to a rapture interpretation in John14:1-4 even before an exegesis of this passage is attempted. These reasons include the significance of the Upper Room Discourse, the eschatological flavor of the discourse, the eschatological interpretation of John 14:1-4 found in the early church fathers, the passage's congruity with the Jewish marriage analogy, and the parallels between John 14:1-4 and 1 Thess 4: Significance of the Upper Room Discourse As previously explained, the position of the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24 25) in Matthew's overall argument plays a significant role in ascertaining whether Christ is speaking of the rapture in Matt 24: Similarly, the position of the Upper Room Discourse (John 13 17) in John's overall argument plays a significant role in discerning whether Christ is speaking of the rapture in John 14:1-4. John explains his purpose in writing his Gospel in 20: These verses say, "Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these 20

21 have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name." First, John writes for the Christological purpose of convincing his readers of Christ's divine identity through a selective record of His signs. Second, John writes for the soteriological purpose of invoking his readers toward faith in Christ. John desires for unbelievers to "believe" in Jesus and for believers to keep on "believing" in Him for purposes of their practical sanctification. To this end, John unfolds the heavenly genealogy of Christ in his prologue (1:1-18) and the divine identity of Jesus through a record of His seven signs and discourses (1:19 11:57). This section is sometimes referred to as the Book of Signs. As predicted in the Old Testament (Dan 9:25), Christ showed up on an exact timetable (Luke 19:38-39, 42, 44) to present His messianic credentials to the nation during His Triumphal Entry (John 12). At this point, the nation of Israel formally rejected Christ as their king. John 12:37 accentuates Israel's unbelief when it says, "But though He had performed so many signs before them, yet they were not believing in Him." John's record of this national rejection at the Triumphal Entry (John 12) then leads to his recording of the Upper Room Discourse (John 13 17). There Christ reveals a new or mystery age known as the Church Age. Although the development of Church Age doctrine is fully accomplished in the Pauline epistolary literature, Christ reveals many Church Age truths in seed form in the Upper Room Discourse. Paul's teaching would bring these seeds to full maturity. Thus, in this discourse, Christ noted, "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come" (John 16:12-13). Chafer explains: The discourse embodies, in germ form, every essential of that system of doctrine which is distinctively Christian. Being addressed to Christians, it does not present truth which is peculiar to Israel, and being addressed to those who are saved, it does not present any feature of salvation by grace which is made possible through 21

22 the death and resurrection of Christ, which truth is implied. This portion is like a seed plot in which all is found that is later developed in the epistles of the New Testament. It serves as Christ s farewell address to believers those whom the Father has given Him out of the cosmos world. 26 Thus, the Upper Room Discourse contains many seed truths that are given greater clarification and explanation in the epistles. 27 Such examples include the believers' oneness in Christ (John 17:20-23; Eph 2:11-22), the Spirit's permanent residence in the believer (John 14:16; Eph 4:30), the believer's union with Christ (John 14:20; Gal 2:20; Rom 6:1-14), the believer's opposition to the world (John 15:18-19; Jas 4:4; 1 John 2:15-17), the necessity for the believer to stay in fellowship with Christ (John13:10; 15:1-17; 1 John 1:5-7, 9), abiding in Christ as a prerequisite for fruit bearing (John 15:1-7; Phil 4:13), the believer's election (John 15:16; Eph 1:4); Christ as the ultimate model of sacrificial living and service (John 13:1-20; Phil 2:5-11), the necessity of divine discipline in the believer's life (John 15:2; Heb 12:5-11), Satan as the god of this age (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 2 Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2), the defeat of Satan at the cross (John 12:31; 16:11; Col 2:15; Heb 2:14), the Spirit as the inspirer of all Scripture (John 14:26; 16:13; 2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21), the Spirit as the illuminator of all Scripture (John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Cor 2:14; 1 John 2:20, 27), Christ's provision of peace in the midst of adversity (John 14:27; Phil 4:7), the necessity of the Spirit's convicting ministry as a prerequisite for salvation (John 16:7-11; 1 Cor 2:14; 2 Cor 4:4), the normalcy of tribulations in the present age (John 16:33; Jas 1:2-4), the believer as the ultimate over- comer (John 16:33; 1 John 4:4; 5:4-5), Christ's present session at the Father's right hand (John 14:12-14; 17:5; Heb 8:1; 10:12-13), the power of prayer (John 14:12-14; Eph 6:18-20; Jas 5:16), the inerrancy of Scripture (John 17:17; 2 Tim 3:16), and the disclosure of Eschatology (John 16:13; 2 Thess 2:1-12). 26 Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, 8 vols. (Dallas: Dallas Seminary, 1948; reprint, [8 vols. in 4], Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1993), 3:25. See also 5:140-42, , Ibid., 5:

23 Since the Upper Room Discourse reveals Church Age truth in germ form, it should come as no great surprise that Christ would also disclose in this discourse how the earthly program of the church will conclude. Christ provides this very teaching through an initial and brief reference to the rapture in John 14:1-4. Conversely, because the focus of the Olivet Discourse is upon Israel's future restoration, it is less likely to find a rapture passage in Matt The different literary emphases between the Olivet Discourse and the Upper Room Discourse are captured on the following chart: Olivet Discourse Upper Room Discourse Scriptural Matt John location Parallel passages Mark 13; Luke 21 Matt 26; Mark 14; Luke 22 Location of Mount of Olives Upper Room address Time of address 28 Third day of the Passion Week Sixth day of the Passion Week General focus Farewell address to Israel Farewell Address to the Church Specific focus Israel's future Divine provision for the disciples after Christ's imminent departure Discourse prompted by: Explanation of which section of Scripture? Christ's prediction of temple's destruction (Matt 24:1-3) Previously written Old Testament Christ's announcement of His soon departure (John 13:1) Unwritten New Testament 1995), Charles C. Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible: New American Standard Bible (Chicago: Moody, 23

24 Eschatological Flavor of the Upper Room Discourse Those who deny that John 14:1-4 is a rapture passage often point out that John's Gospel in general and the Upper Room Discourse in particular are not focused upon Eschatology. While it is true that John and the Upper Room Discourse do not focus upon Eschatology to the same magnitude as does Matthew's Gospel and the Olivet Discourse, it is an overstatement to say that John's Gospel and the Upper Room Discourse make no eschatological contribution. At least three reasons can be given as to why an eschatological insertion should not be surprising in John First, eschatological statements can be found sprinkled throughout John's Gospel as well as in the Upper Room Discourse. Examples include references to the two final resurrections (John 5:29; Dan 12:2; Acts 24:15; Rev 20:4-5), Israel's future acceptance of the future Antichrist in lieu of the true Christ (John 5:43; Dan 9:27a), Christ's promise to preserve and resurrect the believer in the last day (John 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25-26), and the coming of the Spirit who will disclose "things to come" (John 16:7, 13). Second, John likely bypassed many eschatological statements that Christ made in the Upper Room Discourse since they were not germane to the apostle's purpose in writing. John, who wrote his gospel roughly 60 years after the discourse was given, did not write for the primary purpose of disclosing eschatological truth. Rather he wrote for the main purpose of encouraging faith in Christ (John 20:30-31). Given John's candid admission of selectivity employed throughout his Gospel (John 20:31; 21:25), he could have very well omitted many eschatological-oriented statements made by Christ in the Upper Room Discourse that had no direct bearing upon his Christological and soteriological purpose in composing his Gospel. 29 George Gunn, John 14:1-3: The Father's House: Are We There Yet?, online: accessed 2 September 2011,

25 Third, according to Edersheim's reconstruction of the events in the upper room, Christ's promise in John 14:1-4 followed closely on the heels of two eschatological promises. 30 The first of these is Christ's promise in Matt 26:29: "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom." The second of these is the reading of Psalm 118:26 in the progression of the Seder celebration. This Psalm says, "Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the LORD; We have blessed you from the house of the LORD." This verse has tremendous messianic and eschatological implications (Matt 21:9; 23:39). Thus, these two promises furnish the eschatological context for Christ's revelation of the rapture in John 14:1-4. In sum, the preceding reasons indicate that the Upper Room Discourse exhibited the appropriate eschatological background for Christ to unveil the rapture in John 14:1-4. Church Fathers There exists support for a "heavenly and eschatological" interpretation of John 14:1-4 among the earliest church fathers. Gunn cites and quotes five Ante-Nicene fathers who interpreted John 14:1-4 in this manner. They include Papias (ca. 110), Irenaeus (ca ), Tertullian (ca ), Origen (ca ), and Cyprian (d. 258). 31 Thus Gunn concludes: So we see that, from the earliest years following the death of the apostle John, through the mid third century, the promise of John 14:1-3 was seen in terms of a future coming to receive believers to heaven. The ante-nicene fathers did not think that this promise had been fulfilled either in Christ s own resurrection or in the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. And since the promise was seen as something to be fulfilled in conjunction with the believer s bodily resurrection, they clearly were not thinking in terms of multiple comings being fulfilled at 30 Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 8th and rev. ed., 2 vols. (New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1896), 2: Gunn, John 14:1-3: The Father's House: Are We There Yet?,"